Skip to main content
6:00 am
drag. i think in the longer run, the principle of our plan was to recognize what is the most important context in the past couple of decades which is a staggering rise in income inequality. yes, we think revenue increases should be progressive to reflect that. i also realize the key social insurance programs, and they have been the only source of economic strength and security over that time we should not start walking away at those things. reforms of these big spending programs so they do not generate these enormous deficits.
6:01 am
>> i think that is important on the tax side. what we are looking at is not a pro-growth or what is best for the economy, and a solution. we are looking at hitting arbitrary revenue targets. we need to be thinking about both sides of the budget, particularly entitlements. there are a lot of weaknesses and challenges in the retirement programs conducted here not a real sentiment. too many americans live under the poverty level because of their benefits. let's fix that. we need to be talking about reforms that make these programs affordable, sustainable, and a strengthened. >> we are all trying to move you on to the longer-term reform. i think we can all agree that the economy is growing too
6:02 am
slowly right now. the main point over the next few years is to kick the economy growing faster. there are a couple of things you can do about that. one is not to go over the cliff and go back to recession. the second is put in place and strong grand bargain that does the two things done have been mentioned, broadbased reform of the tax code that remains a progressive, arguably more progressive, and slowing the growth of entitlements. he cannot get there unless you do those things. he cannot get their too fast. in our plan, we put up front an additional stimulus to show that we realize the economy is not growing fast enough right now. >> let me get the answer to this
6:03 am
question from the audience about how we can get through the long term fiscal challenges. let's go to the results and see what people have to say. it looks like spending cuts and revenue for income above .250,000 here seems to be a lot of consensus for sharing the pain more broadbased. >> the arithmetic drives to there. if you are serious about stabilizing the debt, there is no other answer. >> i would challenge that. our plan does balance the budget. we have a tremendous problem with debt and spending.
6:04 am
>> if you assume growth, it gives you more revenue. >> we do assume growth. we have a plan that makes it easier for every american, including those of low income. we proceed right away with the entitlement reform. one of the keys to getting stronger growth is reducing the debt overhang we have. there is no doubt in my mind that that is having a negative impact on the economy. >> i want to move on to the specific elements of each of your plans. how do you put a mechanism into agreements that enforces the action everybody seems to want. everybody talks about a fundamental tax reform and income at the form. the last move is the sequester, which everybody hates. how do we make that happen? >> to get it done, you cannot go
6:05 am
over the fiscal cliff. the fundamental market reactions will be severe. we will go into recession. the short run images our ability to recover. if we cannot do this between january and august of 2013 -- 2014 is an election year. if we do not do it in the claim and period of a new congress, is do or die time. >> how do we get to the next thing? >> we are in a different situation.
6:06 am
let's not do the debt limit. we are in a different situation. there is no forcing mechanism that will make the political system safe or deal with this problem if they do not want to. the realize they have put it all for a long time. we have been reelected president and a partially new congress, which is much more aware of the problem and the need to compromise. here is the moment to get it done. >> is not quite clear if you can legislate something on the fiscal cliff. >> two things. i think you need to do something in this period that is a down payment now. you cannot say we are going to do this mechanism and have nothing. if we are going to do tax returns -- tax reform in 2013
6:07 am
and something bad happens, there has to be and will to do it. the country has had legislation for a couple of centuries without having enforcing mechanisms. the question is whether the republicans, democrats, president, congress can come to an agreement. there is to been much focus on the enforcement mechanism. in the end, it is just whether there is the will to do it or not. >> a couple of things. we should not hold solving the immediate problem hostage to some trigger that will solve the long-term problem. the real problems are immense and they are real. everybody believes it will slow the economy down. there seems to be no enforcing mechanism.
6:08 am
the complaint seems to be, they are not harming us. it is really hard to argue that we need to be locked into something when there is no evidence that the budget projections of the future are harming us right now. in the 1990's, there was a market signal an interest rates started to go up. people believed the deficit was given to the economy. we do not know if that is going to kick in, but there is no reason to fight against this hypothetical increase when we have these problems now. >> the only advantage we have is that we are in a better situation today than greece and southern europe. >> is that a fair comparison given the size of our economy and our growth rate? >> chris is a different
6:09 am
situation. spain -- greece is a different situation. spain, france, italy -- they all know they have a problem. they thought they could go on borrowing. he cannot count on the forever and we cannot count on this forever. >> the deficit will look better next year as the economy starts to improve and we are freezing out about a debt problem that does not really exists. >> any sensible projection of the next decade since the death -- debt to gdp level continues to go up. we are so immune to the
6:10 am
arithmetic that we continue to do what we are doing. you want to focus on cutting transfer programs. he did not want to cut the core functions of government -- national security, infrastructure, education. you focus on entitlements and you stop trying to slash discretionary spending. >> suppose we get past the fiscal cliff and we get it to the next congress with a bomb in a second term, republicans less powerful in the house, but still in control. you have your plan that has multiple wish lists, not all what you want to get done is going to get done. pick out one critical thing from your plan that you think is the most important agenda item for
6:11 am
the next congress and administration to do to help the economy and the debt problem. >> from my perspective, it is attacking entitlements and improving the benefits seniors can get from this -- these programs. we need to focus on health care. it is the most robust in the most talked about. the american people are willing to consider changes to health care. that would be changing medicare to fix the finances. rather than taxing the rich, i would reduce the subsidies, make them painful premiums. if you are an affluent senior to medicare, that can help fix the finances and transition to a more marketable, patient- centered approach. we would maintain services as
6:12 am
they exist for seniors today. give them the option to keep what they have caught and give them the option to change. that is crucial. we have to also tackled medicare and medicaid. >> what is the critical thing to do in the next congress? >> first, ensure a full economic recovery. if we make a full economic recovery and we do want to get to work on the budget deficit, recognize the staggering rise in inequality and raise revenue progressively. there is conventional wisdom that taxing the rich cannot give you to been far. that is not true. they have an extraordinary share of income growth over the past 20 years. i would also say in regard to the health programs, everyone knows it is the failure to maintain system-wide health
6:13 am
costs that is the budget deficit out of control. we do some easy, low hanging fruit budget options. then we say, there were a lot of promising cost control reforms in the affordable care at. health-care costs were falling a bit before the recession hits. the see if it bears some fruit. we should not be cutting public investment. the reason why you cut budget deficits is to preserve your private capital stock by cutting the public capital stock is perverse. >> the one thing i'd just say this is the public is ready to deal with health care costs right now. the quality of american political consultants is terrible given all be ads run in the last campaign trashing any politician who tried to move at
6:14 am
all on health care costs. the most important thing to be done is getting our public investments right. but the constraining thing on that is not the will to do that. there is a lot of support for a lot of the kind of investments people want to make. people vary on how much and what they think is optional. the constraining factor is the revenue. that is what is constraining us from doing that. we need to reform our tax system. we need to get more revenue. most of the revenue should come from the top. he looked at all of the uproar about letting the bush tax cuts on people making over $250,000 -- you look at the wealthiest
6:15 am
1%, they get that back in a year. it is not that much money when you compare to the rise in inequality and the growth at the top. we need to try to make the kind of investments we need to do. >> there is no number one. there are two main things that have to be done. reform the tax system. we all for a broadening of the base, which would be more progressive. it would raise more revenue from people at the top, but not from raising their rates. that is feasible and simpson- bowles came out there, too. we need a better tax code. the other thing we must do is slow the rate of growth of the entitlements, especially the health entitlements. there is a good compromise there, too.
6:16 am
we need to put in force of the things in the affordable care at that move toward -- act to incent more efficiency. we would give seniors a choice between traditional medicare and competition on an exchange. we think those guilty things together on the real necessities. we also have a discretionary freeze as in simpson-bowles. we have done that. that was in the budget control act. we do not need to do more cutting on the discretionary side. >> we talked about your plan and changing the tax code to the
6:17 am
consumption place. talk about how that will work and why you think that is a good idea. >> you want to have a tax code and raises revenue with good growth incentives and is simple. this does that. it turns the entire tax code into a traditional ira. when money comes out, you get taxed. the same rate for dividend interest and capital gains. you get away from a lot of the tax planning and efficiencies from that. we keep seeing top rate at 35%. this is the kind of that system we need that will promote growth. he tax system does a lot of things. total contributions, he can use it for social objectives. the pernod and-paramount issue
6:18 am
of our growth -- our moment is growth. -- the paramounts moment is growth. we have tax reform and we have the entitlement reform, but those things have to be done quickly. we do not have the luxury of preventing we can pick the silver bullets and it will all be fine. >> what do you think of the idea of the consumption tax versus the income tax and the fact that it can be progress in the same way? do you think that is true or false? >> i do not think you can get the progressivity of revenue that way. we want taxes to be supportive of growth. we stole some ideas from the bipartisan policy center. wii's to do some negative tax rates for low wage -- we do some
6:19 am
negative that rates for low wage earners. there has been a period of slower overall growth. increasing the progressivity of the tax code is going to stop growth -- i do not see it. we need a row -- a well-run insurance system. the idea that tax reform is the way to get growth is not correct. >> the idea that you will simplify things and get rid of tax avoidance mechanisms by a progressive consumption tax is replacing different pieces of loopholes and creating a giant one loophole that you can try to shift money into. the ira analogy is apt.
6:20 am
if you look at the tax return mitt romney release, a big part of the way he was amused relating things to lower his tax liability was -- a big part of the way he was manipulating keys to lower his tax liability was the ira. >> it is the base that matters. that is where you get the important tax policy decisions. this is a broader base than we have right now. most of what we do is to subsidize consumption through the tax code. with a broader base, you can raise a lot of revenue. the race too much in mind opinion. his taxes people on what they take out of the economy. it does not tax them on what they contribute. >> hours is a consumption tax on income as well.
6:21 am
-- our is a consumption based tax on income as well. we do not tax people for what they put into the economy. we incentivize them to save. that applies to whether you are mitt romney or somebody who is just starting out. that is important. >> i think that a progressive consumption tax could work and we could move very eventually. there is this problem. you have to start from where you are. we have been with an income tax for a long time. people will say, i paid income tax on this and now you are saying i have to pay again when i consumed out of my savings. there is a big transition problem. >> it is a non-trivial exercise.
6:22 am
when you start with a consumption base, the base is what matters. as a practical matter, it is impossible to have a tax system that is as progressive as the income tax system we have. the wealthy consume such a smaller percentage of their income than middle and lower income people. it can be progressive, but it cannot be as progressive as you have in an income tax. we can argue about the economics over and over. i would just say that demands matters, too. >> let's move on to some other subject areas. we have not talked about social security. i would like each of your plan proposals for social security. the eligibility age, where you come down on social security? >> as a matter of the substance,
6:23 am
if you were going to do one thing, to social security reform. it is really easy. it would send the right signal to international capital markets. it has zero near-term austerity impact. it is a disservice to have the system we have now where we say to people come here is our retirement plan to you. at some point, we are going to slash your benefits. that is a disgrace. this is something we should do quickly. it involves all those things and it is sensible. >> i agree with that. it involves all of those things, including raising the cap on the tax and putting in another bracket so that it is more progressive than social security already is. the main point is do it now because people need to know that it is going to be there for them. the people who said, it won't
6:24 am
run out of money until 2037, people who are retiring in 2037 are already in the labor force. they need to know the social security is there for them. >> is there a place you would put it from where it is now? >> it needs to cover 90% and get their gradually. >> we have a social security reform plan where we do not raise the retirement age. we take off the cap and the employer side of the peril tax -- payroll tax and we shore up benefits that the bottom. >> josh, where are you guys on that? >> we scrap the cap. the social security problem is a onetime level shift, and utterly manageable problem.
6:25 am
it is separate from the rubble where you have rising health- care costs. this is not something that will snowball. social security benefits in the united states -- we are stingy by international standards. we are a rich country and we can afford them for sure. you increase the number of people who are getting social security benefits and you have a constituency to keep them. the idea we should pull the trigger today -- i do not see it. >> allison? >> first day, we are all living longer. we should immediately increase the retirement age. we should do it for medicare and social security. congress could do that today. i think it's a no-brainer. let's go ahead and do that.
6:26 am
let me talk about our social security plan. social security should be means tested. we start phasing it in immediately in our plan. we do not think we should sock it to the rich and penalize them for doing well. i do not think they should be getting full benefits. i do not think mitt romney needs to get social security benefits when he retires. he has that big ira. we should start means testing social security. we make it more like what it was originally intended, which is insurance against poverty. we do not want seniors to outlive their savings and we do not want them to have a threat of living in poverty in retirement. social security for too many seniors does not give that. we stand in the benefits, but we
6:27 am
moved to a that benefit. it is no longer income replacement. it is a flat benefits. it will be there if you need it. if you are mitt romney and you put all of your money in with corzine and you wake up and do not have anything next day, you get a flat social security benefits. he will be able to live above the poverty level. the first one is important. it takes common sense ideas that are on the table. the right and the left have talked about them. we moved into that cyclically and slowly phase in the flat benefit and economic security model. >> for clarification, everyone always says we are all living longer and that is why we can afford an increase in retirement age. not so much. it is highly skewed to high income people.
6:28 am
>> on the urgency issue, it has been the tradition to exempt people from social security reform. i will be february 55, 2003. i am the trilling days of the baby boom -- i will be 55 on february 3. i am trailing the days of the baby boom. >> i want to start down the line. the first question is, do we go over the cliff or not go over the cliff? do we really get fundamental tax reform and entitlement reform in the next congress or are we back here next year talking about the same thing? >> 30% chance of going over the cliff. 70% chance of rationality. house and senate ready to do
6:29 am
fundamental tax reform. white house standing in the way. we can get real entitlement reform, but i doubt it. the president is committed to the current structure of medicare and medicaid. >> i think we will not go over the cliff. we are too smart for that. the chances of getting a grand bargain that reforms entitlements may not to be the way we have been describing it, but it slows the rate of growth in the future. tax reform and raise more revenue, preaching good. >> because the climate is different now, less partisan and at each other's throats? >> the president would like a legacy of fixing this problem and congress would not want to be seen as the impediment to getting it fixed. >> yes or no on the cliff.
6:30 am
>> the one thing i agree on thingdoug -- agree with doug on is the percentage of the possibility of going over the cliff. have you seen congress lately? people talk about lowering rates and you talk about the consequences for what you have to do to the tax base in terms of reining in itemize deductions, that is where you will jam up tax reform and the entitlement reform. >> i put a higher chance of going over the cliff. i think the president will be firm on the 250,000 dollars and above on tax cuts. congress will be equally firm. after july 1, it becomes
6:31 am
entirely possible. >> there is definitely a likelihood that we will go over the fiscal cliff. i am not happy about it. when you look at it, you have republicans and conservatives that once pro-growth tax reform. into the future and setting aside the fiscal cliff, we have to have the incrementally beginning of some entitlement reform. there are going to be peace, growth, and prosperity for everyone. >> no more panels for us if it all gets done. thank you very much. thank you to our panel. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]
6:32 am
>> president obama says he and congressional leaders have urgent business to do, mentioning tax rates for the middle class and job creation. the president's statement came just before a meeting with congressional leaders at the white house. >> i welcome the congressional leadership here and thank them for their time. we are all aware that we have some urgent business to do. we have to make sure taxes do not go up on middle-class families, our economy remains strong and we are creating jobs. . that is something that people
6:33 am
all across the country share. our challenge is to make sure we are able to cooperate together, work together, find some common ground, make some tough compromises, build some consensus to do the people's business. the people are looking for action. the people want to see if we are focused on that and not our policies in washington. i hope this is the beginning of progress where we are able to come to agreement and reduce our deficit in a balanced way and we will deal with some of these long-term the impediments to growth. we will be focusing on making sure people are able to get ahead. i want to thank all of the leadership for coming. with that, we are going to get to work. there is one other point i want
6:34 am
to make. my understanding is that tomorrow is speaker boehner's birthday. to those of you who want to wish him birthday -- we will not embarrass him with a cake. because we could blow out all of the candles that were needed. thank you. >> following their meeting with the president, house and senate leaders spoke briefly with reporters. >> we had a constructive meeting with the president to talk about america's fiscal problem. i outlined a framework that deals with reform of our tax code and reforming our spending. i believe the framework i have
6:35 am
outlined is consistent with the president's call for a fair and balanced approach. to show our seriousness, we could revenue on the table. as long as it is accompanied by a significant spending cuts. we are going to continue to have revenue on the table. it will be income meant for our colleagues to show the american people -- incumbent for our colleagues to show the american people that we are serious. i believe we can do this to avert the fiscal cliff in front of us today. >> this is not the first time we have dealt with these issues. we feel we understand what the problem is. we felt good about what we were able to talk about in the. we have the cornerstone of being able to work something out.
6:36 am
we are going to have to difficult some of the things we know are a problem. it is like when we arrive at a point when we know something has to be done there is no more, let's do it some other time. we have a plan and we will move forward on it. we are going to work during the thanksgiving recess. i think it was a constructive meeting. i feel good about what we were able to talk about. >> it was a constructive meeting. we had a recognition that every person in america knows that we must reach agreements. the speaker spoke about a
6:37 am
framework going into next year. i was focusing on how we send a message to confidence to consumers in the short run. we should have a goal in terms of how much deficit reduction. we should have a deadline before christmas. we should show some milestones of success so that confidence can build as we reach our solution. if we do not reach agreement, not only will we miss the opportunity to do something good for our economy and lift the spirit and confidence of our country but we will have an economic downturn that must be avoided. we understand our responsibility there. we understand it has to be about cuts and revenue and about growth. it has to be about the future. as we talk about revenue, we
6:38 am
have to do so in a way that promotes growth and supports the future. it was good. i feel confident that a future the with-that's -- that an agreement can be in sight. >> it was a constructive meeting. we all understand where we are. i can say on the part of mind members that we can not save the country until we have entitlement programs that fit the demographics of the changing america in the coming years. we are prepared to put revenue on the table provided we fix the real problems. most of my members without exception believe we are in the dilemma we are in not because we tax too been little, but because we spend too that much. i had a chance to talk to the president about his trip to burma, a country that i have had
6:39 am
a longstanding interest in in the last 20 years it was an important step to take. >> activists representing minority groups also met with the president and vice- president. this is about 20 minutes. >> we are ready. let me say that we just concluded a meeting for over an hour with the president and vice president with various organizational advocates. it was a very candid meeting.
6:40 am
we discussed our concerns about the constituencies that we represent -- working class, a poor people, women, students. we laid out to the president the feelings that we get from many areas of the country. for some that we represent, it is a fiscal cliff. for others, it is a sliding down from a more comfortable slow. we are there and leading across the aisle to say that we hope that there'll be an agreement in these negotiations that they go ahead and stop any hike on taxes to the middle class and the working class. that has been agreed upon in the house. that has been agreed upon by all the groups as well as the house of representatives. first, start with what we agreed with so that people despite their political and
6:41 am
partisan views can face the holidays without an increase in taxes on middle class and working people. at the same time, we do not want those who are most vulnerable to be on the chopping block. i think the president heard us loud and clear. i think that the president was very open and generous with hearing from each and every one of us. i think the collective message and the consensus was to build on where we are. middle class people, working class people should not be facing the holidays not knowing
6:42 am
whether or not they will be facing an increase in taxes at the end of the year. we need immediate action. it is a cliff for some and a slide down the slope for others. let the cliff be avoided immediately. >> the president was in a great mood and very positive. let me reaffirm the most important thing right now for middle and working-class americans -- if those tax increases took effect, it would have an average rate of about $3,000 per family.
6:43 am
for someone making $55,000 per year is quite devastating. we understand the vulnerabilities of people. especially those hit by hurricane sandy. secondly, we all believe in the context of this that those human investments programs that support and sustain working class and poor americans should not be the sacrificial lamb in any discussion. those programs have already been cut and reduced to an extent. we are very unified in our
6:44 am
thinking. thirdly and finally, we stand here as representatives of organizations and constituencies that we work for, but we stand here as americans with the sincere hope that the men and women in this city can find common ground we know they can find if the all exercise good will and a commitment to the common ground. we think that is one of the most important messages. there is a sincere feeling to find common ground. we thank the president for having us today. we appreciate that. sister janet and then jim. >> i'm the executive director of -- you probably know me as the nun on the bus.
6:45 am
what i take away is the president's awareness and commitment to the struggles that working class folks have in the united states. he understands that you can work for minimum wage and still be in poverty. we want to make sure that working class families are protected in this important negotiation. that is at the heart of it for us. it is at the heart of 100% of our nation. he was clear that we need to have come to a resolution on this issue. these issues that we care about are coming together in this one moment. as a person of faith, i look at negotiators on all sides of the out to make sure that we find a
6:46 am
way to settle this issue and free our economy from this brinkmanship. make sure the middle class and the working poor are taken care of. make us a wonderful nation that we are. we need to have a way forward. i heard the president's commitment and all of our commitments. thank you. >> hi. my name is janet. it was an honor for me to be part of this meeting with so many distinguished leaders who are at the forefront of fighting for working class families. we work very hard to turn out a lot of votes in this election. we want to make sure that people understand that we care about the issues. one of the most important issues that we are facing in
6:47 am
this country is the state of the country's fiscal health. i was pleased with him affirming that we would not tax middle class families. that is something we care very much about. we care about the principle to protect the most vulnerable. we saw a very confident president who extended to us a hand to work together. the election might be over, but the issues are still on the table for the country. we care very much about the
6:48 am
future of our country. we have a big interest to make sure that we have a deal that is fair as it relates to taxes and entitlements. there is a strong sense of unity by all of the leaders to fight hard for a very fair budget bill. thank you. >> these are not as political issues. they are religious. despite the unfairness of the media's focus on what the religious issues are, some of the biggest issues -- like how we welcome the stranger. i want to change the conversation from a fiscal cliff to the fiscal soul of the nation. what is the fiscal soul of the
6:49 am
nation? what kind people will we be? people who voted differently in this election, we are saying the principle is the deficits and how to resolve them is a moral issue. during the holiday season, we're going to be reaching out to the poor people and say to our political leaders, do not make decisions fiscally that make the poor poorer and make our job harder. we want to connect what is happening in the streets to what is happening in washington. we have a broken system. how do we in the book politics to do the right thing? how do we make a path to fiscal sustainability that includes us all?
6:50 am
that is what we are talking about. how do we make a pack that includes all of us? you judge a nation not by its military firepower or its gross national products, but how we take care of the poor and the vulnerable? make sure all of us are a part of where we are going from here. this is about the fiscal soul of the nation and not just the fiscal cliff. thank you. >> hi. and president of the oldest civil rights organization. we are in tough times. this reminds me of something my
6:51 am
grandmother used to say. it comes down to eggs and legs. you ask the lamp to pitch in his leg. we are here to advocate for the lamb in this equation. the next step has to be the congress steps up and passes a bill to make sure that we preserve a tax cut for the 98% of us who cannot afford to give a $3,000 at christmas. it could be disastrous to our economy. it would be a tragedy for many families. it would create joblessness very quickly in a number of communities.
6:52 am
we need the republicans and to really think deep and the card and to pull back from the cliffs 98% of families for whom this is a leg question. it is clear that the values of this nation -- looking forward, there is reason to be hopeful. we have to focus on taking the next step. that is to ensure that a bill gets to the president's desk that makes up 98% of us and really make up the bulk of this nation. thank you. >> i was very encouraged by this meeting.
6:53 am
we came out of an election were young people were very engage and came out to vote in big numbers. it was clear the president was listening to young people. he has young people in mind when he speaks about the future of the middle class and future generations. i think the president made strong point about how we need to invest and how to deal with the deficit in a balanced way. looking at the middle class tax hikes that? millions of people in school and out of school and unemployed. job training and education means a lot to young people in terms of having that pathway to the middle class. it was a very positive meeting. i was encouraged to see the president listened to the
6:54 am
concerns and the voices of young americans. >> good afternoon. i am the chair of the national council of asian-pacific americans. my message to the president today was that the asian- pacific islanders are listening. a majority of our committee members voted for the president in late last week a's election. the issues they care about are the issues that affect all americans -- immigration, education, and the state of the economy. there is a vision of shared prosperity. there are those of us who can do more and should do so. middle class family should not be under attack. the individuals who are
6:55 am
dependent on programs -- that is the image of shared prosperity. it was a very productive and constructive meeting. we felt that our issues were being heard. moving beyond the economy, we can address issues of immigration and education and other issues. >> i am the ceo of arp. we represent all americans 50+. there are two priorities for all americans and that is financial security and health security. we do not want to fall off the cliff and into deeper poverty. there are conversations around social security and how to
6:56 am
secure for current and future generations. we want to make sure that medicare and medicaid are available. we will continue to have those conversations. the president has been focused on making sure that americans continue to have security on the health side and financial side. >> good afternoon. i am the president and ceo of the leadership council and on civil and human rights. i was honored to attend a meeting today with the president and joined by my colleagues representing america today.
6:57 am
we were here to express our unity with the president's vision of shared prosperity. we will leave you with one simple message -- we argued that it would be detrimental to the nation and the economy and to the american people that if we raise taxes on the middle class and the most vulnerable, especially as we enter the holiday season this year. that is a message that we share with the president. the efforts that have been taken by the senators of the united states and the house of representatives to make sure that the taxing of the middle class and most vulnerable are not raised is the message we left to the president. thank you. >> you will be available for one on one.
6:58 am
thank you for coming. >> next, "washington journal." >> literally, 82 days. the truman, he presided over the senate. nowadays, the vice president does not bother with that unless his vote is needed to break a tie. true and never learned anything from fdr or his father. it was a transition with zero knowledge. that doesn't happen anymore. got a phone call from the white house. get to the phone right away. i picked up the phone. at the other end, they said get to the white house as soon as you can -- as you can. he grabbed his hat and dashed out. he had a car, of course.
6:59 am
they gave him a chauffeur. he went to the white house. he was taken upstairs to the second floor, which was the family fled. he was led by eleanor roosevelt. she said, harry, president is dead. he was in total shock. he said, what can i do for you? she said, harry, what can we do for you. you are in trouble now. >> from his early life through his presidency, a look at the early life of harry truman sunday night at 0 -- at 8:00 p.m. >> this morning, a discussion on the primacy of e-mails, especially when a federal investigation is involved. then the director of the carbon tax center talks about republ

Politics Public Policy Today
CSPAN November 17, 2012 6:00am-7:00am EST


TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 14, America 4, Washington 3, Ira 3, United States 2, Spain 2, Greece 2, Eleanor Roosevelt 1, Harry Truman 1, Allison 1, Boehner 1, Sandy 1, Bowles 1, Obama 1, Southern Europe 1, Truman 1, Burma 1, Secondly 1, Italy 1, Wonderful Nation 1
Network CSPAN
Duration 01:00:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 91 (627 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 11/17/2012